Quote:
Brian, we had planned this protest in advance of the event. We'd tried talking to Windell last year about our suspicions, but the discussions quickly turned into defensive posturing and were unproductive.
We'd decided well in advance to take this course of action; it had nothing to do with his qualifying position (nor should it...)
See my response about court being held and a verdict determined even before the paperwork was filed. It was pre determined that #24 was illegal well in advance of Saturdays event.
Quote:
Greg,
The fact that Mr. Windell believes NASA and EMRA will embrace him as a legitimate competitor, if they do, says volumes about those organizations and the integrity of their race programs.
Really, no need to take a cheap shot at EMRA or NASA. This is an SCCA discussion and your comment is not relevant to #24 being legal or illegal.
Quote:
Who are you??? It makes it a lot easier to accept your comments when there is a name attached to them.........
Really not relevant to the discussion either....Are you implying that only if you know what my name is, you will accept my comments "a lot easier"?...come on Jeff. You know who I am....
Quote:
Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.
YOU said right there Dave.
Quote:
I refuse to get into any mud-slinging - especially with someone who is not willing to post their name in a response. I suspect you won't even in future posts.
As far as this weekend, a casual glance showed his front airdam WELL below legal limits...but that was my own personal viewpoint and one to be verified by the tech guys. It will never be known 100% why he refused to be torn down, take a fine and get a 6-month suspension. But I think it is reasonable to think that instead of standing tall and proving his legality, he chose to not allow anyone to see. That speaks volumes to me and eveyone who has asked me about this.
The witch hunt comments are obviously sour grapes. Last year, Greg and Joe 'manned up' and approached Windell about the perception of his car. As Greg has mentioned, things quickly deteriorated and nothing was accomplished. That was Windell's opportunity to talk about the issues which he neglected to take.
I am sorry he feels slighted in any way but this was a perfect opportunity to shove it right back up our a$$es by allowing a teardown and being found legal. I wonder why he didn't do that....
Andy, see my note to Jeff about posting my name. You guys all know who I am so why an issue all of the sudden?? Does posting my name in my signature make me one of the "boys"???........if so, I decline. Last time I checked, we were still a free country with the ability to make most of our own choices. This I hope will not become a mud slinging match and stay somewhat on topic.
I am also impressed Andy that with a "casual glance", you were able to determine right there that the spoiler was out of spec. I would hate to think what you would have seen if you actually looked closely. I however applaud you by also STATING that that was ONLY your opinion and had to be verified with tech. It still does not negate the fact however that you has also boldly stated "ILLEGAL EXTERIOR PARTS" implying that you knew they were illegal ...........EVEN though you know for a fact that you were merely speculating based on a casual glance and presumably here say.
You know Andy, not everyone thinks the same way. While it might be "normal" for you to want to shove something up someone's a$$ to get back at them for whatever, FORTUNATELY, we do not all think that way. Seems to me that you are implying that the #24 was illegal and had convince you and others that he was illegal because he did not seize the opportunity to shove it up your a$$. Yes???NO???
Quote:
This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! He didn't leave because his feelings were hurt! Pulleeeze! He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
Court was NOT held and decided in advance! Where do you come up with that!?? Nobody goes to the trouble to write a protest unless they really are darn sure the car is illegal. But .....the protester doesn't "Decide" the case. Heck, illegal cars squeak through protests because the protest was improperly written. The judge is the Steward, and the Steward made no ruling on this in advance, as far as I know.
Shane (Hawthorne) has come back to race, but unfortunately he's been dogged with mechanical issues. I heard...but it was second hand, that his motor blew on one occasion, and something happend on a second race, but thats all I've heard. Oh, and he got married, I think, so that might be keeping him busy, (and broke, LOL)
Jake, we've butted heads on this before, so this is just a continuation. I actually agree with you that Windell did not leave on Saturday because someone hurt his feelings, but DISAGREE 100% with your statement " He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
My disagreement comes from your inability, in logical terms, to be inside of Windells head (on Sautrday or any day for that matter) knowing his thought process at that time and ultimately his reason(s) for his decision.
So when you begin your response with a statement such as" This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! you should keep your own spoken (in this case typed) words in your mind as you proceed.
In addition, using your vast knowledge and understanding, you indicated that apparently, #24 continously blew motors/heads whatever, implying and strongly suggesting that it was because he is/was illegal. You also indicated that Shane H is back but unfortunately is being dogged by mechanical issues. This is the same Shane who is now supposed to be racing "legal" . Well using your logic, apparently Shane has not been rehablitated because if he is also dealing with mechanical issues, then he must still be using illegal parts. Correct????? Or is it that he is breaking for reasons other that being illegal???? (Not including tying the knot as that can break things as well).....Or is it cars with legal motors can INDEED have mechanical issues?? You decide because you are in a "know" position. Shane, this is not taking a "shot" at you...
Quote:
Which brings up anpother point. I can't speak for these four guys, but the post above seems to indicate that this was a gang up. Protests of this nature are often done by a group, as it's a very good way to share the expenses, which can be significant.
See my note about a witch hunt. Protests can indeed be expensive and usually are only done by those having the means and willing to foot the cost. How many guys do you know outside of the top 5 ITA drivers in the NE who are in a position to do this???? Just think of how many people it would take to file such a protest against someone like Greg or Andy. That would indeed take a 'GANG" and it would probably never happen. You know that as well as I do.
Quote:
To carry that analogy to its logical conclusion, in our case "the witch" committed suicide by running and jumping into the fire the moment she heard someone scream the accusation, long before any trial was convened...and we didn't even get to see if she floated...GA
Fortunately Greg, the #24 witch did not commit suicide. The hunt was planned and crafted to perfection as you stated....You said you also knew what the response would be as you guys had already discussed the #24 options when the plan was revealed. Obviously, you guys put a lot of time and effort to ensure that you obtained the desired result. See my note to Andy about the opportunity to shove something up someone's a$$ regarding committing suicide and floating.
Quote:
It sounds to me like Greg tried reason last year but ran head first into that ego. I wish someone else had made another effort. I doubt whether we'll see him again. I do respect him for being so honest in his discussions on rules compliance, but it seems like that honesty should have provoked more friendly discussions with his competitors than it actually did.
Sure sounds like Greg "tried" to reason last year, does'nt it, but was confronted by ego. Well its all #24's fault then. He (#24) was the bad guy and everyone else was the goody guys...the goody guys always win, right. This is not a disagreement with what you are saying. Who knows how the "reason/discussion" really went down? Was it done in a threatening and or confrontational manner? Was it done in a " hey Windell, lets talk about the illegal stuff on your car??? Was it done in a "we/I would like to look at your car (feel free to look at mine)??? Or was this just thrown together and done on the fly??? Look I am not saying that Greg did anything incorrectly because I was not there at the time he and Windell had the "talk". I am sure you were not present either. We only know what we know based on what Greg stated.
None of that makes any difference at this point. It is already a done deal. Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.
Quote:
Keep in mind that all TRUE stories (protests) have two sides and this one is no exception. I've heard his version and it would surely make you scratch your head a bit. I suspect that the "real true story" lies somewhere in the middle of the two versions.
^^Enough said. I do not believe we will have the opportunity to hear a complete and unbiased version of either side, not that it matters now. At this point, it is a combination of second, third, fourth and fifth hand versions of this past weekend and all the pieces which lead up to it. I am confident that the NE region ITA group will go on smoothly without #24...at least until the next threat shows up.
Quote:
All that being said, lets hope the reasons the competitor refused to have his car torn down had nothing to do with cheating. You are leading by example and for that Greg you should be congratulated.
Good luck this year.
I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that.
See you guys at the track. :birra: :eclipsee_steering: